Monitors Internet filtering....."The OpenNet Initiative is a collaborative partnership of four leading academic institutions: the Citizen Lab at the Munk Centre for International Studies, University of Toronto; Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University; the Advanced Network Research Group at the Cambridge Security Programme, University of Cambridge; and the Oxford Internet Institute, Oxford University.
Our aim is to investigate, expose and analyze Internet filtering and surveillance practices in a credible and non-partisan fashion. We intend to uncover the potential pitfalls and unintended consequences of these practices, and thus help to inform better public policy and advocacy work in this area. To achieve these aims, the ONI employs a unique multi-disciplinary approach that includes:
1. Development and deployment of a suite of technical enumeration tools and core methodologies for the study of Internet filtering and surveillance;
2. Capacity-building among networks of local advocates and researchers;
3. Advanced studies exploring the consequences of current and future trends and trajectories in filtering and surveillance practices, and their implications for domestic and international law and governance regimes..."

"n The Listening Post this week: behind the Rohingya crisis, a vicious media campaign has steadily intensified the pressure on an embattled people. Plus, the media black hole in Sinai, Egypt.
Rohingya: Hate speech, lies and media misinformation
The number of majority Muslim Rohingya forced from their homes in Myanmar is now around 400,000. The United Nations says it looks like a "textbook example" of ethnic cleansing.
The country's de facto leader - a former winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and darling of the international news media - is being seen in an entirely new light. Aung San Suu Kyi and her government are on the defensive. She has taken to talking about fake news and a "huge iceberg of misinformation".
Aung San Suu Kyi's refusal to condemn the violence is a troubling angle for many Western journalists to cover, given the way they have venerated her in the past..."

Status: Not Free..."Introduction:
"Higher rates of internet access and digital advocacy improved internet freedom, though the year also saw the highest number of prosecutions documented since liberalization began in 2011.1
Myanmar went through its second phase of political transition, shifting power from the military-backed government to the National League for Democracy (NLD) party chaired by Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi in April 2016.2 Troublingly, internet users were tentative in their discussion about the new government, and continued to practice self-censorship after the November elections, fearing harassment and censure from the still-powerful military, and even supporters of the democratically elected leadership.
The unprecedented political dynamism of the general elections in November 2015 was marred by intimidation of internet users by supporters on both sides of the political divide. With the new NLD administration sworn in on March 30, 2016, rights groups expect reform. Dozens of political prisoners were pardoned and released in April.3 Another early step was to streamline bureaucracy with the creation of a new Ministry of Transport and Communications.
The government of former military leader President Thein Sein officially ended media censorship in 2012. Norway’s Telenor Group established the country’s first independent connection to the international internet, and Qatar’s Ooredoo launched mobile phone service across large parts of the country in 2014. The government passed a Telecommunications Law to facilitate this opening of the market.4 However, it was the basis of several arrests for online speech in 2015 and 2016. And the outgoing communications ministry issued its last mobile telecommunication operator license to a newly-formed consortium in a move that observers said advantaged the military’s financial interests.
Online mobilization was particularly dynamic. All major political parties engaged on social media, which was an influential platform in major cities, and internet usage nationwide was 12 percent higher than usual on election day, according to one report.5However, intolerance is also rampant online, aggravated by discriminatory policies against ethnic minorities like the Muslim Rohingya,6 who are denied citizenship under Myanmar’s laws. Religious nationalist movements negatively influenced public discourse on the internet, especially in the run-up to the elections and immediately after the new government took office. In a new development, some NLD supporters are showing intolerance for criticism of Aung San Suu Kyi..."

"...Internet freedom in Myanmar declined during the coverage period of this report in comparison with
the progress made since the country undertook liberalization in 2011.
The government and security
forces stepped up intimidation of internet users during social protests, intensifying conflict in ethnic
minority regions, and during preparation for the 2015 national elections..."

"Democratic Voice of Burma, or DVB, began in 1992 when exiles in Norway began transmitting news and information back home by radio and shortwave into Myanmar. DVB is now based in Chiang Mai, Thailand, from which U Khin Maung Soe spoke to Myanmar Times senior reporter Nyan Lynn Aung about why media has been one of the most successful areas of reform – and why there is still so far to go..."

"Reporters seeking information from government ministries know that the task is fraught with “ifs”. If they can find a phone number and if the phone call goes through and if someone does answer and if it is indeed the correct person, chances are they will get a gruff brush-off. All the ministries in Nay Pyi Taw have official spokespersons, as part of changes to improve transparency and media relations initiated by President U Thein Sein, but few, if any, actually speak to the press. Deputy Minister for Information U Ye Htut says attempts to encourage these spokespersons to engage with the media have largely failed due to a continued wariness of the press and a lack of access to high-level discussions."

"One year after the government officially struck down laws obstructing free press in Myanmar, a parliamentary bill could allow previous censorship practices to re-emerge. When Thein Sein's Union Solidarity and Development party government ended the last of the censorship laws in August last year, many hailed a new era of free expression and an end to the pressures placed on journalists over the previous half century.
Still, many journalists are concerned by the state of media reform in the country. Currently, a publishing bill that critics say gives the Ministry of Information (MOI) overly broad powers to issue and revoke publication licenses has been passed by the lower house of parliament and is set for consideration by the upper house..."

"In January 2013, the Burmese government announced plans to liberalize the country’s
telecommunications sector and invited bids for two nationwide telecommunications
licenses. Successful bidders will be allowed to provide a range of services, including mobile
and Internet services. The Burmese government has promised to significantly reduce the
cost of mobile phones and has set an ambitious goal of 50 percent mobile penetration by
2016, a remarkable increase from current penetration estimated at 5-10 percent.
Human Rights Watch has long believed that Internet and mobile technologies have an
enormous potential to advance human rights. Developing Burma’s information and
communications technology (ICT) and telecommunications sectors could enhance
economic growth and civic participation in a country that has been closed for decades.
Email, social media, and cell phones have become essential tools for journalists, human
rights defenders, and civil society groups worldwide because these technologies support
instant communication, access to information, and effective organization on the ground.
However, these benefits may be jeopardized unless governments and corporations
safeguard the ability of people to use new technologies freely and without fear of reprisal.
Improved telecommunications networks can become powerful tools for censorship and
illegal surveillance, absent protections for human rights and other critical measures.
Yet Burma’s democratic reforms remain incomplete and the government and its security
forces continue to commit serious human rights violations. Companies entering Burma face a significant risk of contributing to abuses, particularly in sectors, such as
telecommunications and the Internet, that have been linked with past abuses and where
rights-based reforms to date have been inadequate. Opening up these sectors to
international investment raises the risk that the government may seek to involve
technology companies in illegal surveillance, censorship, and other abuses.
In this report, Human Rights Watch has outlined several steps necessary to promote
adequate human rights protections for Internet and mobile phone users in Burma, and the
actions needed to foster responsible investment in Burma’s telecommunications and
Internet sectors. Telecommunications and ICT companies should not move forward in
Burma until such measures are in place, in view of the human rights risks. The analysis
and recommendations contained in this report are based on research conducted from
February to April 2013. The report’s analysis focuses on laws most relevant to Burma’s
telecommunications and ICT sectors, and does not provide a comprehensive treatment of
Burma’s laws, legal system or constitution...To respect the rights of the people of Burma, international telecommunications and ICT
companies should take meaningful steps at the outset to assess the human rights impact
and address any harm that may result from their operations. They should conduct what is
often referred to as “human rights due diligence” and adopt robust safeguards to prevent
and address abuses, including with respect to the rights to freedom of expression, access
to information, and privacy..."

"The announcement was hailed around the world as a further sign of reform: Myanmar would again allow privately owned daily newspapers from April 1.
In the media industry, where companies and journalists have lobbied hard for the right to publish daily rather than weekly, the news was greeted with a mixture of relief and trepidation, as the reality of compiling, printing and distributing a newspaper every 24 hours sunk in..."

"I am confident I am speaking on behalf of all journalists working in the private sector in Myanmar – and perhaps most of those working for state-run newspapers – when I say that up until August this year censorship has been the curse of our professional lives.
On a personal level my response to censorship has ranged from quiet exasperation to furious contempt. Censorship has been the cause of outbursts in the news room which proved beyond any doubt to many of my Myanmar colleagues that I am an uncivilised barbarian; it is the ostensible reason why my dearest Myanmar friend, Sonny Swe, the former deputy CEO of The Myanmar Times, one of the few civilian victims of the purge of Military Intelligence in 2004, was sentenced to 14 years’ jail the following year. It was eight years in November since he was taken away.
I knew that I would be working under one of the worst censorship regimes in the world when I accepted a position with The Myanmar Times in June 2001, so what was the attraction?..."

"If you want a quick illustration of how much some things are changing in Myanmar then this article is a pretty good place to start. Let’s tick off the key parts of the story.
Facebook. Popular protest. Protestors greivances aired. Quoted responses from two government representatives. Clear official sympathy for the greivances, with some indication of improvements to come.
Kudos to all the journalists in Myanmar who are now getting a chance to show what they can really do.
Full media freedom in Myanmar? Will the day arrive sooner than many thought?"

29 Mar 2012
Presentation to the Conference on Media Development in Myanmar, Organised by the Ministry of Information and UNESCO Rangoon, Myanmar, March 19-20, 2012.....CONCLUSION:
"...At the outset I emphasised that law is the essential business of government and noted the critical part to be played by the tripartite system of law making, law enacting and law protection. The legislators, executive and judiciary fulfil critical functions without which the rule of law fails and the fabric of sustainable society falls.
To set solid foundations for sustainable society, there are important laws, which should be drafted according to international standard and enacted accordingly. Critical are those that protect and uphold the rights to freedoms of expression, assembly and information and freedom of the press. They are a stable society’s backbone and shoulder blades.
Robust legal frameworks for freedoms of expression, information and the media are critical and irrevocable human rights in their own right. They are also powerful social goods in that they enable government to fulfil its tri-partite functions, to maintain its responsibilities to the law and to uphold the best practices of good governance. The transparency provided by freedom of information, the scrutiny provided by freedom of the press and the critique provided by freedom of expression create the environment in which high quality accountability government can flourish and deepen.
In other words if law is the skeletal framework on which stands and falls the strength and sustainability of a society, then the rights to freedoms of expression, information and the press is also a government’s personal trainer! A challenge, a goal, an encouragement and a motivator: without which no government can perform to the highest standard or achieve the best possible for those who give governments its raison d’etre: the people."

"...Earlier this month, the government unblocked several foreign news websites, including Reuters, the Guardian, CNN, and the Bangkok Post. Some of the newly accessible sites - Voice of America, Radio Free Asia, and the BBC - have Burmese language sections. The websites of exiled Burmese news organisations such as the Democratic Voice of Burma and Irrawaddy can now be accessed, as well as social networking and streaming sites Hotmail, Blogger, and Youtube.
This step toward liberalisation, however welcome, is inconsistent with the government’s overall monitoring policy. Not only do a large number of websites remain off-limits, but internet usage is still restricted to the country’s public internet cafés. Since November 2010, internet cafes in in Rangoon were required by the government to install closed-circuit cameras, screen-capture and keystroke-logging software so that online activities could be recorded and traced back to individuals. Flash drives have also been banned since May of this year..."

"Myanmar's new government has stopped blocking some foreiggn websites such as the BBC and YouTube in a gesture toward openness that is tempered by remaining harsh laws that still keep readers of such sites at risk of arrest.
Once-banned websites that were opened this week for viewing include the Voice of America and the British Broadcasting Corp., as well the Democratic Voice of Burma, Radio Free Asia and the video file sharing site YouTube.
The unannounced move is the latest step taken by the Southeast Asian nation's new leaders to boost hope, however faint, that authoritarian rule here could finally be easing. The country's long-standing military government handed over power to a nominally civilian regime earlier this year..."

Political subjects and politicians (Time & Tone of the Coverage): Democratic Voice of Burma (DVB TV); "The Irrawaddy", "Mizzima", "Myanmar Times" and "Voice" Journal
Charts of Burmese State-sponsored media coverage of political subjects and politicians in the period April-June 2011

CONCLUSION:
"The results of monitoring in 2011 (which was conducted after the appointment of a new civilian
government with the aim to assess if there was any change in the state policy revealed the
opposite and confirmed the previous trends and patterns observed during the previous monitoring
periods. It is thus possible to conclude that the monitored state-controlled media in Burma do not
follow any journalistic standards, but serve only as a mouthpiece of the ruling powers. With more
than a half a year after the flawed 2010 parliamentary elections, condemned by the United
Nations and the whole international community, the main news programs of state-controlled TV
channels once again showed only the top state officials and completely ignored any other
stakeholders..."

CONCLUSION: "The results of monitoring in 2011 (which was conducted after the appointment of a new civilian government with the aim to assess if there was any change in the state policy revealed the opposite and confirmed the previous trends and patterns observed during the previous monitoring periods. It is thus possible to conclude that the monitored state-controlled media in Burma do not follow any journalistic standards, but serve only as a mouthpiece of the ruling powers. With more than a half a year after the flawed 2010 parliamentary elections, condemned by the United Nations and the whole international community, the main news programs of state-controlled TV channels once again showed only the top state officials and completely ignored any other stakeholders..."

Introduction: "While the Burmese military junta is interested in expanding and exploiting information and
communication technologies (ICTs) for business and propaganda purposes, it makes
aggressive attempts to regulate access to the internet and digital media, control content, and
punish citizens for any online activity that is seen as detrimental to regime security. The
government uses a wide range of means to restrict internet freedom, including legal and
regulatory barriers, infrastructural and technical constraints, and coercive measures such as
intimidation and lengthy prison sentences. Although the authorities lack the capacity to
pervasively enforce all restrictions, the impact of sporadic implementation and the ensuing
chilling effect is profound.
There has been gradual improvement in access to ICTs over the past three years, but
the junta has also aggressively targeted users who are involved in antigovernment activities
or have contact with foreign news media. Since its crackdown on a wave of September 2007
protests led by Buddhist monks, the military regime has more strictly enforced licensing
rules that require the owners of cybercafes, where most Burmese users obtain access, to
monitor users’ screens and cooperate with criminal investigations. Both online and offline
censorship and information controls were increased surrounding the November 7, 2010
national elections,
which secured a sweeping victory for the military-backed party and were
widely condemned as flawed.
The state-owned Myanmar Post and Telecommunications (MPT) company launched
the first official e-mail service in November 1997. The 2002 establishment of the first
private internet-service provider (ISP), Bagan Cybertech, helped to increase the number of
users in the country, though the company was later taken over by the junta. By 2010, there
were over 520 registered cybercafes in Burma, located mainly in a few major cities.
Censorship was further reinforced after the release of prodemocracy
leader Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest on November 13.
The
government’s first attempt to restrict internet freedom was the 1996 Myanmar Computer
Science Development Law, which made possession of an unregistered computer modem
and connection to unauthorized computer networks punishable by up to 15 years in prison.
Other laws and actions since then have furthered the government’s efforts to clamp down
on unsupervised internet use."

"Burma took drastic measures in 2010 to reorganise the country’s Internet and to arm itself with the means, at the next sign
of a crisis, to cut off its population’s Web access without affecting official connections. Prior to the November 2010 elections
– the first in twenty years – censors resorted to massive crackdowns, intimidation and cyberattacks to reduce the risk of any
negative coverage. Tampering is now at its height..."...Widespread Net censorship
in Burma...Outstanding bloggers...Three netizens are still
languishing in prison...Reconfiguring the Burmese
Internet behind a smokescreen...Unreliable Internet connections
in the run up to the 7
November 2010: Slowdowns,
cyberattac ks and tampering...Da w Aung Sa n Suu Kyi:
Free and connected?

Conclusion: "The previous monitoring reports reflecting the period prior to the elections noted that the statecontrolled
media in Burma act as a mouthpiece of the ruling powers and do not follow any
professional journalistic standards. This report which covers the the period of two weeks after the
e-day showed that the general trends in the state media coverage identified in the previous reports
remain unchanged.
While the media coverage in state controlled outlets focused on election, its coverage was narrow
and lacked any analytical or critical views of the process. Clear bias in favor of state officials and
incumbents, compounded by a complete lack of any critical coverage of authorities and a lack of
coverage of opposition views characterized the coverage offered by the Burmese state media. The coverage which the release of NLD leader got in state media was extremely limited and
insignificant in comparison with the extent of presentation of the authorities.
The exile media offered diverse picture of political actors and gave large attention to the NLD
leader after she was released from her house arrest; the NLD was a dominant political subject
presented in the exile media. In this regards the elections were overshadowed by the sudden
presence of the NLD leader in Burmese political life and the NLD, while actively boycotting
elections, dominated the post election coverage of exile media"

Conclusion: "The previous monitoring reports reflecting the period prior to the elections noted that the statecontrolled media in Burma act as a mouthpiece of the ruling powers and do not follow any professional journalistic standards. This report which covers the the period of two weeks after the e-day showed that the general trends in the state media coverage identified in the previous reports remain unchanged. While the media coverage in state controlled outlets focused on election, its coverage was narrow and lacked any analytical or critical views of the process. Clear bias in favor of state officials and incumbents, compounded by a complete lack of any critical coverage of authorities and a lack of coverage of opposition views characterized the coverage offered by the Burmese state media. The coverage which the release of NLD leader got in state media was extremely limited and insignificant in comparison with the extent of presentation of the authorities. The exile media offered diverse picture of political actors and gave large attention to the NLD leader after she was released from her house arrest; the NLD was a dominant political subject presented in the exile media. In this regards the elections were overshadowed by the sudden presence of the NLD leader in Burmese political life and the NLD, while actively boycotting elections, dominated the post election coverage of exile media"

Top Developments:
• Junta bars foreign reporters, censors speech prior to national election.
• Aung San Suu Kyi freed, but government still jails journalists, critics...
Key Statistic
13: Journalists imprisoned as of December 1, the fourth‐highest figure in the world...
"After nearly five decades of uninterrupted military rule, Burma moved toward an uncertain new era in November when it staged national elections and freed the pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. The new parliament, although dominated by the military junta's chosen candidates, was the first civilian government in the country since 1962. Military leaders, notorious for their international isolation, sought international legitimacy through the election. "But the vote was so rigged, it had the opposite effect," The Washington Post noted in an editorial. "Rules were written so that, no matter how people voted, the military would retain control; but even so, the regime could not resist Election Day intimidation and ballot-box stuffing." ..."

"Despite very low connectivity, Internet
users in Burma have managed to
communicate valuable information
to the outside world during explosive
political events. The Burmese military
government continues to enforce
stringent overall access restrictions,
the most extreme of which occurred
during the complete shutdown of the
Internet in Burma in September and
October 2007. On top of these barriers to access, the government also polices Internet
content through one of the most severe regimes of information control in the
world..."

Conclusion:
"The three months of monitoring revealed that monitored state-controlled media in Burma do not
follow any professional journalistic standards, but only serve as a mouthpiece of the ruling
powers. Plain bias in favor of state officials and incumbents and no reflection of opposing or
critical views in state-controlled media was observed during the entire three-month monitoring
period. In the period preceding the elections, the main news programs of the state-controlled TV
channels were showing only the top state officials and completely ignored any other stakeholders.
They offered an exceptionally limited range of diversity of political actors, with any other
political subjects having virtually no access to the country’s most important sources of
information.
It is also of concern that these disturbing trends in the way the Burmese state-controlled media
cover political entities are not result of short-term anomalies, but genuine trends in the Burmese
media. These negative trends are to some extent meliorated by the exile media which do offer a
diverse range of views, with the main opposition leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and her party
National League for Democracy getting the most significant coverage. However, the potential
geographical coverage of the exile media, and thus their accessibility to Burmese population is
much lower than that of the state-controlled media in Burma.
Overall, election contestants were allowed only very restricted access to the media and were
prevented from fully enjoying their right of freedom of expression. The complete lack by the
media in Burma of any independent and objective reporting limited the voters’ access to a broad
range of information which would enable them to make an informed choice at the ballot box."

Conclusion: "It is expected that the Yatanarpon Myanmar National Web Portal will provide faster bandwidth and improved Web services to Burmese Internet users. However, according to the current setup, only users from the government ministries, especially those from the Ministry of Defence, will enjoy faster Internet connection and consequently better Web services.
The FTTH high-tech communication system is an impressive development compared with the previous system. It can also be assumed that the new system will cost more. However, given the low per capita income in Burma, only a tiny fraction of the public will be able to enjoy the FTTH system.
The segregated nature of the new ISP system would also allow the authorities to shut down the civilian ISP without affecting the two other ISPs that serve the government and the military. The authorities are likely to use that opportunity to stifle freedom of press and expression.
The new system also grants the military exclusive control over the Hantharwaddy National Gateway. The military is therefore now in a position to spy on all Burmese citizens – civilians, soldiers and government service personnel."

Top Developments:
• Some political prisoners freed, but eight journalists still held.
• Government censors all print publications, controls broadcasters...
Key Statistic:
1st: Ranking on CPJ's Worst Countries to Be a Blogger...
"Throughout the year, Burma's ruling junta emphasized its plans to move toward multiparty democracy after decades of military rule, a long-promised transition that dissidents and others viewed as a sham to further consolidate the military's power. As the country geared up for general elections in 2010--the first since the military annulled the 1990 elections, which were won overwhelmingly by the political opposition--authorities maintained strict censorship over the local news media and held at least nine journalists behind bars..."

"Burma’s already beleaguered journalists came under heavy attack after massive Cyclone Nargis pounded the country’s southern coastal region in May, killing an estimated 84,500 people and severely affecting another 2.4 million, according to U.N. estimates. As local and international criticism grew over a slow and inadequate response to the natural disaster, the military junta intensified censorship, working to suppress news that graphically portrayed the extraordinary scale of the storm’s devastation. The silence was lethal.
The Information Ministry’s Press Scrutiny and Registration Division (PSRD) sent a directive to editorial offices outlining how the humanitarian crisis could be covered; it banned publication of photographs that showed dead bodies and any critical reports about the government’s response. The reclusive regime initially refused international emergency assistance, including from the United Nations, but later agreed to allow limited outside help after the scale of the disaster and displacement became apparent.
At least five local journalists were jailed because of cyclone coverage the authorities considered in breach of its strict guidelines, according to CPJ research. Eine Khine Oo, a photographer on assignment for Ecovision Journal, and Kyaw Kyaw Thant, a freelance journalist, were arrested on June 10 while covering a demonstration staged by cyclone victims in front of U.N. offices near Rangoon. Eine Khine Oo was later sentenced to two years in prison, Kyaw Kyaw Thant to seven years..."

"Intimidation, arrests and draconian prison sentences reached new heights in a media crackdown in Burma last year...
JOURNALISTS in Burma faced Orwellian-type scrutiny and were subjected to imprisonment and intimidation throughout 2008, while exiled Burmese media groups were also attacked—via their computers...."

A Burmese journalist who works for The Associated Press has received the 2008 Journalism and Courage Award from the International Women’s Media Foundation...
"The journalist, Aye Aye Win, has worked as a reporter in Burma for nearly 20 years—a “risky business,” she said in a written acceptance speech. Only a free press could guarantee a free society, she said..."

"Burma’s scribes use old ruses and new technology to stay true to their word and dodge the junta’s efforts to censor freedom of expression...
Burma’s censorship board, the Press Scrutiny and Registration Division, continues to face new challenges in its never-ending efforts to sanitize the country’s print media. Armed with magnifying glasses and mirrors, the censors are on a mission to root out hidden political messages in poems, novels, stories and advertisements.
Burma has a well-earned reputation as “an enemy of the press,” but Burmese writers say they are undaunted by the ruling regime’s efforts to muzzle free expression. Censors or no censors, they say, writers of real mettle will always find creative ways to give voice to their true feelings..."

"...When monks took to the streets in September, our editor—who also owned the publication—allowed us to go and cover the events, but we were never able to write about them. I noticed that many Burmese reporters established contacts with international and exile media groups.
There was no satellite TV receiver in our office, either.
When we originally asked the editor to install one, so that we could watch coverage of the demonstrations, he surprisingly agreed. But when the shooting began he changed his mind and banned us from going into the streets or having any contact with the demonstrating monks.
“You really don’t want to see the news, that’s why I won’t install a receiver,” he said.
“The uprising will be over in two or three days, anyway,” he said. He was right—the uprising was short-lived. The satellite dish never was installed.
In our newsroom, only the management desk and the copy-typists worked with computers. We reporters and editors had to write our stories by hand. They were then edited and passed on to the typists. The printouts were given back to us to be checked for spelling.
Frequent power cuts interrupted the work routine. We had our own generator, but it sat outside our office and when it was running the heat and noise were unbearable..."

"Burma’s exiled media took center stage during the September uprising. Now they must not rest on their laurels...
If the Burmese people are ready for change, then we must ask whether the exiled Burmese media is ready for change. The answer, I believe, should be a resounding “Yes!”
Burma enjoyed perhaps the liveliest free press in Southeast Asia in the 1950s and 60s. Burma’s first constitution in 1947 guaranteed citizens the right to express their opinions and convictions.
Unfortunately, the freedoms of expression and media were short-lived in Burma.
The first assault on journalism came soon after the military coup in 1962. Press freedom gradually disintegrated thereafter, truncated by Gen Ne Win’s socialist regime.
Newspapers were nationalized and many foreign news agencies were asked to pack their bags. Journalists and editors found themselves in prison.
During the 1980s, all forms of public expression and publications had to pass through Burma’s notorious censorhip board, now known as the Press Scrutiny and Registration Division, even though Burma’s second constitution, drawn up in 1974, guaranteed freedom of expression..."

"Burma’s generals may have underestimated the power of the Internet during the 2007 uprising, but they are now playing catch-up...
The Burmese military government has found a new enemy—the growing number of “cyber dissidents” who are gaining popularity both inside and outside the country. The bad news is that the junta usually finds a way of defeating each new enemy..."

Burmese journalists came under heavy assault in August and September when covering pro-democracy street protests and the military government’s retaliatory crackdown, marking significant deterioration in what was already one of the world’s most repressive media environments. The government banned coverage of the uprising and sought to isolate the nation by impeding Internet and phone service. Local and citizen journalists, however, proved innovative and persistent in circumventing the government’s electronic blockade.

84 MINUTES RUNNING TIME. TRAILER PLUS 9 PARTS. FOR PARTS 1-9, CLICK ON ALTERNATE LINKS, BELOW, OR IN RIGHT HAND COLUMN OF YOUTUBE PAGE..."Armed with small handycams undercover Video Journalists in Burma keep up the flow of news from their closed country despite risking torture and life in jail. Their material is smuggled out of Burma and broadcast back via satellite.
Joshua, age 27, becomes tactical leader of a group of reporters, as Buddhist monks in September 2007 lead a massive uprising. Foreign TV crews are banned from the country, so its left to Joshua and his crew to keep the revolution alive on TV screens all over. As government intelligence understands the power of the camera, the VJs become their prime target."

Executive Summary:
"This bulletin examines the role of information technology, citizen journalists, and bloggers in Burma and presents a technical analysis of the abrupt shutdown of Internet connectivity by the Burmese government on September 29, 2007, following its violent crackdown on protesters there. Completely cutting international Internet links is rare. Nepal, which severed all international Internet connections when the King declared martial law in February 2005, is the only other state to take such drastic action. Although extreme, the measures taken by the Burmese government to limit citizens' use of the Internet during this crisis are consistent with previous OpenNet Initiative (ONI) findings in Kyrgyzstan, Belarus, and Tajikistan, where authorities controlled access to communication technologies as a way to limit social mobilization around key political events. What makes the Burmese junta stand out, however, is its apparent goal of also preventing information from reaching a wider international audience.
The shutdown of Internet connectivity was precipitated by its use by citizens to send photographs, updates and videos that documented the violent suppression of protests in Burma, information that contributed to widespread international condemnation of the Burmese military rulers' gross violations of human rights.
We examine the impact of communication technology in shaping these key political events in Burma, the limitations of these tools, and the prospects for the next round of information wars".

Myanmar’s authoritarian military junta is slowly expanding access to the Internet while maintaining one of the world’s most restrictive systems of control. Despite the fact that less than 1 percent of Myanmar access the Internet, the government has targeted online independent media and dissent with the same commitment it has demonstrated to stifling traditional media and voices for reform.

"Military-run Burma, also known as Myanmar, remained one of the most repressive places for journalists, trailing only North Korea on CPJ’s 10 Most Censored Countries list. The junta, which calls itself the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), exerted Orwellian control over all media, harassing or jailing journalists who strayed from the official line in their reporting or who helped foreign correspondents with critical reporting. Two journalists were imprisoned for attempting to film outside the country’s controversial new capital, Pyinmana, after the generals decided without warning to move the seat of government from Rangoon. The administration held at least seven journalists behind bars, earning Burma the rank of the world’s fifth leading jailer of journalists..."

"Report by the Committee to Protect Journalists" ......
Forcing their citizenry to live behind a wall of repressive ignorance, Burma's military leaders have shown no signs of liberalizing one of the world's harshest regimes.